Contax N Image Thread
/forum/topic/850075/72

1       2       3              72      
73
       74       end

nehemiahphoto
Registered: Oct 27, 2011
Total Posts: 788
Country: United States

Hey guys,
I ordered a second kipon adapter, but it still freezes my a7 often. It doesn't seem ISO, shutter speed or aperture related.

I updated the firmware on my a7 to version 2.0 but this didn't help.

I tried formatting my memory card, but this didn't help.
I am shooting on "A" mode. Also tried shooting full manual to no avail. I am adjusting aperture by the wheel directly right of the "C2" button while the lens is set to 1.4. I am shooting only the 85 N. I couldn't find any similar issue except one page on Flickr saying he had to turn off the camera and u mount the lens. I am unsure of my adapter version, but this is my second one, and both were new from Adorama.

Thoughts? Similar experience? I love the lens, but the camera is freezing between every 2-8 shots--unmanageable.



masimo
Registered: Oct 07, 2002
Total Posts: 507
Country: United States

You should get the Fringer. He's just finishing up the firmware for the A7rii so if you order now you'll get the latest and greatest. I've seen nothing but complaints about the kipon and the grief and time expended exceeds the price difference for me.

Mike



masimo
Registered: Oct 07, 2002
Total Posts: 507
Country: United States

Michael,

Those colors look like old postcards. Nice work.

Mike



masimo
Registered: Oct 07, 2002
Total Posts: 507
Country: United States

Nehemiah,

Have you cleaned the contacts on both the lens and the camera carefully. You might try to get some rubber bands or large o rings and wrap them around the body of the lens and then back over the camera to force the lens to sit flat against the flange. That might help to keep the electical juice flowing between the lens and the camera.

Mike



nehemiahphoto
Registered: Oct 27, 2011
Total Posts: 788
Country: United States



masimo wrote:
Nehemiah,

Have you cleaned the contacts on both the lens and the camera carefully. You might try to get some rubber bands or large o rings and wrap them around the body of the lens and then back over the camera to force the lens to sit flat against the flange. That might help to keep the electical juice flowing between the lens and the camera.

Mike


Yeah, I did this. Cleared on a7, lens, and both sides of the adapter. Thanks though, it's was a good idea. Do you guys know how the a7rii will play with the lens as far as AF goes? Will I get to use the touted eye af?



masimo
Registered: Oct 07, 2002
Total Posts: 507
Country: United States

The eye focus is limited to native lenses as far as I know. With Fringer you will get very good focus the phase detection focus on the a7rii with his upgrade. You can keep track of what he's doing here: http://forum.xitek.com/thread-1246178-1-1-1.html
The top half of the page is his introduction and sample images. About half way down you'll start to see the most recent posts. It's in Chinese but google will translate it. You'll frequently see "head" in a weird context. It is the Chinese word for lens "jing tou". You can get the gist of most of it though.

It is cheaper to buy it on aliexpress then on ebay: http://www.aliexpress.com/item/Fringer-s-Contax-N-mount-E-mount-A7-A7r-Nex-full-auto-adapter/1836954414.html. Shipping is extremely fast and there is a return period.

Mike



nehemiahphoto
Registered: Oct 27, 2011
Total Posts: 788
Country: United States

Very helpful Mike. Thank you. Now that's it's going to costs me an additional $600 just use it, makes me wonder--now it's a 2k investment...

I can get an laea4, Sony CZ 85 1.4 and Minolta 80-20 HS/200 2.8 APO for just the price of this 85 N + fringer. Although I do find the 85N MUCH better than the 85CZ...

Do a-mount lenses count as native when used with the laea-4 do you know?



masimo
Registered: Oct 07, 2002
Total Posts: 507
Country: United States

Not sure about A lenses and eye focus. Have you been watching the sonyalpharumors site or dpreview forums. There are lots of people testing out all kinds of options. getdpi too.

Yes, the apo 400 drew me to the Fringer. Right now I have the 50, 24-85, 70-200, 100 macro and the 400. But I'm wondering if I moved the right direction or not. The new sony lenses and some of the old minolta lenses are getting a lot of good press. I had an A7rii on order for delivery in the first batch but didn't get it. Now waiting and trying to decide what to do. For the last 2-3 years I've been shooting the sigma dp2m and dp2q. I've been waiting for sony to catch up sensor wise and while still not completely there compared to sigma they are close enough. Carrying all this gear is getting old fast though and the sigmas still call to me. Maybe I'll end up back with Sigma despite their shortcomings. Or maybe I'll end up with an rx100iv or an rx10ii.

Mike



nehemiahphoto
Registered: Oct 27, 2011
Total Posts: 788
Country: United States

I shot a mount primarily for years. The cz 85, 135, 24-70, 16-35 and 24 were all fabulous lenses. The Minolta 80-200 2.8 HS and 200 2.8 are fantastic, while the Mino 85 1.4 is a great very good lens, even still, though to me hasn't quite aged as well.

I never shot the Mino 100 f2 nor the Mino 200 f4 macro, but neither of these lenses interest me.

I think the FE 16-35 is a good lens, but nothing crazy. Same with the FE 35 2.8. The 70-200 is the same-very competent, nothing spectacular. The 24-70 sucked badly. The FE 90 2.8 is relatively massive, and unappealing to me. The FE 35 1.4 seems impressive, but I like 28s, and also preferred the rendering of my Rx1 sonnar.

The FE 28 is very good, but has Sony coatings, and I find the colors not at all delicate and over saturated.

The new Batis lenses seem quite good, but I want a 21 or 28 batis. Ming said the 85 batis is a neutral lens, and I read that elsewhere, which is too bad though not killer.

But that's the problem with e-mount-you cherry pick the best lenses from the last 50 years, and the native lenses don't seem to have the magic, but they do have the convenience and are highly competent. But I find myself constantly going back to great lenses like the Mino 58 1.2, CZ 135 1.8, RX1 sonnar, Leica R 80 1.4, Minolta 80-200 2.8, 85L, CV 180/4, 16-35cz, and I fear the 85N....

But the bag gets too huge to carry all heavy non-native lenses+adapters

I have been curious about the sigma's for years...almost purchased several times--the colors and pixel level acuity is remarkable. I read a good interview on Ming's cite 2/3 days back, gives me hope sigma will keep up the camera game, but this time with something more "user freindly"



Dutchflyer
Registered: Sep 16, 2008
Total Posts: 44
Country: Vietnam

Last month I traveled to Lombok island - Indonesia and brought along side the 24-85. Although slows aperture, I was amazed of its clarity & saturation.

Thanks David @lenticular11 for the superb lens
















hiepphotog
Registered: Aug 19, 2009
Total Posts: 2495
Country: United States

nehemiahphoto wrote:
I shot a mount primarily for years. The cz 85, 135, 24-70, 16-35 and 24 were all fabulous lenses. The Minolta 80-200 2.8 HS and 200 2.8 are fantastic, while the Mino 85 1.4 is a great very good lens, even still, though to me hasn't quite aged as well.

I never shot the Mino 100 f2 nor the Mino 200 f4 macro, but neither of these lenses interest me.

I think the FE 16-35 is a good lens, but nothing crazy. Same with the FE 35 2.8. The 70-200 is the same-very competent, nothing spectacular. The 24-70 sucked badly. The FE 90 2.8 is relatively massive, and unappealing to me. The FE 35 1.4 seems impressive, but I like 28s, and also preferred the rendering of my Rx1 sonnar.

The FE 28 is very good, but has Sony coatings, and I find the colors not at all delicate and over saturated.

The new Batis lenses seem quite good, but I want a 21 or 28 batis. Ming said the 85 batis is a neutral lens, and I read that elsewhere, which is too bad though not killer.

But that's the problem with e-mount-you cherry pick the best lenses from the last 50 years, and the native lenses don't seem to have the magic, but they do have the convenience and are highly competent. But I find myself constantly going back to great lenses like the Mino 58 1.2, CZ 135 1.8, RX1 sonnar, Leica R 80 1.4, Minolta 80-200 2.8, 85L, CV 180/4, 16-35cz, and I fear the 85N....

But the bag gets too huge to carry all heavy non-native lenses+adapters

I have been curious about the sigma's for years...almost purchased several times--the colors and pixel level acuity is remarkable. I read a good interview on Ming's cite 2/3 days back, gives me hope sigma will keep up the camera game, but this time with something more "user freindly"


Have you tried the Fringer? With fast native lenses are coming together with eye-focus and face-recognition, it's hard to make a case for these lenses. From the pictures you sent me, I really like the N 85 draw, the best I have seen at 85 really. But if I have to manual focus it then I would rather go with the CZ 135 or Zeiss 135 APO.The fringer video shows quite quick AF speed, so I'm hopeful.



wayne seltzer
Registered: Dec 22, 2007
Total Posts: 4754
Country: United States

Still love shooting my N85/1.4. Works well on my 5DsR!



BenjaminSmith
Registered: Feb 08, 2012
Total Posts: 248
Country: United States

I received my copy of the Contax N 24-85 two days before leaving on a New York business trip. Pics of the setup here: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/982966/231#13236805 Given the nature and duration of the trip I brought only the 24-85 and Canon FD 35 TS with me. I felt a little naked without at least the Vario-Sonnar 35-70 as backup!

In short, I am very happy with the performance of the 24-85 at every focal length. Flare resistance is decent if not perfect. Sharpness is way more than adequate, colors are wonderful and many images exhibit the Zeiss pop. Distortion is negligible. On the downside the lens does not snap into focus nearly as easily as the 35-70. The 24-85 takes more time and use of magnification on the A7ii to nail critical focus. The Fringer adapter and autofocus might help, though I doubt it. At least manually focusing is smooth and ergonomically not unpleasant.

Note that I've worked over all these images with the exception of sharpening, which is at Lightroom defaults.



nehemiahphoto
Registered: Oct 27, 2011
Total Posts: 788
Country: United States

hiepphotog wrote:
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I shot a mount primarily for years. The cz 85, 135, 24-70, 16-35 and 24 were all fabulous lenses. The Minolta 80-200 2.8 HS and 200 2.8 are fantastic, while the Mino 85 1.4 is a great very good lens, even still, though to me hasn't quite aged as well.

I never shot the Mino 100 f2 nor the Mino 200 f4 macro, but neither of these lenses interest me.

I think the FE 16-35 is a good lens, but nothing crazy. Same with the FE 35 2.8. The 70-200 is the same-very competent, nothing spectacular. The 24-70 sucked badly. The FE 90 2.8 is relatively massive, and unappealing to me. The FE 35 1.4 seems impressive, but I like 28s, and also preferred the rendering of my Rx1 sonnar.

The FE 28 is very good, but has Sony coatings, and I find the colors not at all delicate and over saturated.

The new Batis lenses seem quite good, but I want a 21 or 28 batis. Ming said the 85 batis is a neutral lens, and I read that elsewhere, which is too bad though not killer.

But that's the problem with e-mount-you cherry pick the best lenses from the last 50 years, and the native lenses don't seem to have the magic, but they do have the convenience and are highly competent. But I find myself constantly going back to great lenses like the Mino 58 1.2, CZ 135 1.8, RX1 sonnar, Leica R 80 1.4, Minolta 80-200 2.8, 85L, CV 180/4, 16-35cz, and I fear the 85N....

But the bag gets too huge to carry all heavy non-native lenses+adapters

I have been curious about the sigma's for years...almost purchased several times--the colors and pixel level acuity is remarkable. I read a good interview on Ming's cite 2/3 days back, gives me hope sigma will keep up the camera game, but this time with something more "user freindly"


Have you tried the Fringer? With fast native lenses are coming together with eye-focus and face-recognition, it's hard to make a case for these lenses. From the pictures you sent me, I really like the N 85 draw, the best I have seen at 85 really. But if I have to manual focus it then I would rather go with the CZ 135 or Zeiss 135 APO.The fringer video shows quite quick AF speed, so I'm hopeful.


Hey Hiep! Sorry for the slow response. Essentially, I haven't had the answer/experience I would like with the lens. After shooting it with the Kipon which constantly and randomly froze my a7, so I returned it to Adorama. I ordered the Fringer. The adapter is well made and worked well, except, at least on an a7, because of the AF system, the AF was unusable, even on high contrast static subjects at 1.4 and f2. Customer service was excellent, and I sent the adapter back for a full refund. If I had an A7rii, I think the lens would be spectacular. I read the AF is better the the Contax N50, which is pretty decent if you watch their promo video. I also read it's faster than the 85L II. I believe it--even though the AF couldn't lock on at all, the lens went from infinity to MFD quickly.

As for if it's justified, that really depends. Purely on price, I don't think, realistically, I can "justify" a lens like the Leica 80 R versus a Canon 85L FD at nearly treble the price. Same with the Contax 85N versus a Batis. And honestly, I would not opt to use the N85 as a general 85mm lens--it's very good, optically but an Otus, Batis, or ZA 85 1.4 is a technically better lens. Having said all that, if you want a true portrait lens (like me), I found the N85 and Leica 80R to be the best portrait lenses, the Contax 100 Sonnar , ZA 135 1.8, and Mino 58 1.2 a tier just below, and the 85L and ZA 85 1.4 below these.

I find the N85 to have tremendously rich colors, especially greens, without looking overly saturated or unbalanced. It has a marvelously smooth drawing with a perfect balance of sharpness. The lens has fabulous bokeh and unlike Ziess' other Sonnar--reminds more of a Biotar or the Contarex 80 f2 I owned. It has the perfect fall off in sharpness in the corners and vignetting. I feel the tonal range in shadows/darks of the lens are especially nuanced and really give photos a specific and gorgeous dimensionality. Overall, I was shocked by how good the lens actually is for portraiture--files are seriously gorgeous. It's very good as a general lens too. So, not sure where that leaves you. I am a bit of a fiend when it comes to these lenses, and even though I can't actually use the 85N currently. I'll be keeping it. It's the only lens I have I can't actively shoot I have noticed because of focus transition, and bokeh, even WO, everything feels like it's in the same photo. With the Canon 85L or ZA, the WO rendering can feel like the subject was pasted on a plan of bokeh. One isn't better, but I found the N85 distinct in this sense. I have read the CY and ZF 35 1.4's parallel this relationship, despite being spec'ed the same.

I actually have an Leice 80 R on order, so I'll shoot these two head to head and keep only one. But if you're going to need AF, I don't think there's a lens as good as the N85, though others are cheaper/smaller/more practical. I like the Batis files I have seen, and overall it's a better corrected lens, like the ZA, but it's looks like it lacks the magic of the N85.



hiepphotog
Registered: Aug 19, 2009
Total Posts: 2495
Country: United States

nehemiahphoto wrote:
hiepphotog wrote:
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I shot a mount primarily for years. The cz 85, 135, 24-70, 16-35 and 24 were all fabulous lenses. The Minolta 80-200 2.8 HS and 200 2.8 are fantastic, while the Mino 85 1.4 is a great very good lens, even still, though to me hasn't quite aged as well.

I never shot the Mino 100 f2 nor the Mino 200 f4 macro, but neither of these lenses interest me.

I think the FE 16-35 is a good lens, but nothing crazy. Same with the FE 35 2.8. The 70-200 is the same-very competent, nothing spectacular. The 24-70 sucked badly. The FE 90 2.8 is relatively massive, and unappealing to me. The FE 35 1.4 seems impressive, but I like 28s, and also preferred the rendering of my Rx1 sonnar.

The FE 28 is very good, but has Sony coatings, and I find the colors not at all delicate and over saturated.

The new Batis lenses seem quite good, but I want a 21 or 28 batis. Ming said the 85 batis is a neutral lens, and I read that elsewhere, which is too bad though not killer.

But that's the problem with e-mount-you cherry pick the best lenses from the last 50 years, and the native lenses don't seem to have the magic, but they do have the convenience and are highly competent. But I find myself constantly going back to great lenses like the Mino 58 1.2, CZ 135 1.8, RX1 sonnar, Leica R 80 1.4, Minolta 80-200 2.8, 85L, CV 180/4, 16-35cz, and I fear the 85N....

But the bag gets too huge to carry all heavy non-native lenses+adapters

I have been curious about the sigma's for years...almost purchased several times--the colors and pixel level acuity is remarkable. I read a good interview on Ming's cite 2/3 days back, gives me hope sigma will keep up the camera game, but this time with something more "user freindly"


Have you tried the Fringer? With fast native lenses are coming together with eye-focus and face-recognition, it's hard to make a case for these lenses. From the pictures you sent me, I really like the N 85 draw, the best I have seen at 85 really. But if I have to manual focus it then I would rather go with the CZ 135 or Zeiss 135 APO.The fringer video shows quite quick AF speed, so I'm hopeful.


Hey Hiep! Sorry for the slow response. Essentially, I haven't had the answer/experience I would like with the lens. After shooting it with the Kipon which constantly and randomly froze my a7, so I returned it to Adorama. I ordered the Fringer. The adapter is well made and worked well, except, at least on an a7, because of the AF system, the AF was unusable, even on high contrast static subjects at 1.4 and f2. Customer service was excellent, and I sent the adapter back for a full refund. If I had an A7rii, I think the lens would be spectacular. I read the AF is better the the Contax N50, which is pretty decent if you watch their promo video. I also read it's faster than the 85L II. I believe it--even though the AF couldn't lock on at all, the lens went from infinity to MFD quickly.

As for if it's justified, that really depends. Purely on price, I don't think, realistically, I can "justify" a lens like the Leica 80 R versus a Canon 85L FD at nearly treble the price. Same with the Contax 85N versus a Batis. And honestly, I would not opt to use the N85 as a general 85mm lens--it's very good, optically but an Otus, Batis, or ZA 85 1.4 is a technically better lens. Having said all that, if you want a true portrait lens (like me), I found the N85 and Leica 80R to be the best portrait lenses, the Contax 100 Sonnar , ZA 135 1.8, and Mino 58 1.2 a tier just below, and the 85L and ZA 85 1.4 below these.

I find the N85 to have tremendously rich colors, especially greens, without looking overly saturated or unbalanced. It has a marvelously smooth drawing with a perfect balance of sharpness. The lens has fabulous bokeh and unlike Ziess' other Sonnar--reminds more of a Biotar or the Contarex 80 f2 I owned. It has the perfect fall off in sharpness in the corners and vignetting. I feel the tonal range in shadows/darks of the lens are especially nuanced and really give photos a specific and gorgeous dimensionality. Overall, I was shocked by how good the lens actually is for portraiture--files are seriously gorgeous. It's very good as a general lens too. So, not sure where that leaves you. I am a bit of a fiend when it comes to these lenses, and even though I can't actually use the 85N currently. I'll be keeping it. It's the only lens I have I can't actively shoot I have noticed because of focus transition, and bokeh, even WO, everything feels like it's in the same photo. With the Canon 85L or ZA, the WO rendering can feel like the subject was pasted on a plan of bokeh. One isn't better, but I found the N85 distinct in this sense. I have read the CY and ZF 35 1.4's parallel this relationship, despite being spec'ed the same.

I actually have an Leice 80 R on order, so I'll shoot these two head to head and keep only one. But if you're going to need AF, I don't think there's a lens as good as the N85, though others are cheaper/smaller/more practical. I like the Batis files I have seen, and overall it's a better corrected lens, like the ZA, but it's looks like it lacks the magic of the N85.


To be honest, I'm looking for a portrait lens purely for photographing my kid. AF is crucial in this respect. And I'm all for the special rendition for this purpose (at least that's what I'm telling my wife) . I'm not after smooth blob (Minolta/Sony 135 STF) nor am I after the typical neutral/busy Zeiss bokeh. This Contax seems to be the best of both worlds. AF is still a big question though. Do let me know when you have a chance to try it on the A7RII.

I don't know, maybe when Sony release their 135 1.8 SSM, my problem would be solved. Or when I just make stupid decision like getting the Mitakon 135/1.4 .



nehemiahphoto
Registered: Oct 27, 2011
Total Posts: 788
Country: United States

wayne seltzer wrote:
Still love shooting my N85/1.4. Works well on my 5DsR!


Pics or it didn't happen Wayne



wayne seltzer
Registered: Dec 22, 2007
Total Posts: 4754
Country: United States

nehemiahphoto wrote:
wayne seltzer wrote:
Still love shooting my N85/1.4. Works well on my 5DsR!


Pics or it didn't happen Wayne


Just a few from my last trip, these with N 85/1.4



wayne seltzer
Registered: Dec 22, 2007
Total Posts: 4754
Country: United States

Bump to the front page!



lenticular11
Registered: Jul 16, 2011
Total Posts: 1239
Country: Australia

Nice work Wayne and Fred!

These two are from Iceland, January 2013.



wayne seltzer
Registered: Dec 22, 2007
Total Posts: 4754
Country: United States

Thanks David!
Nice shots from Iceland!
A place I hope to get to sometime soon!



1       2       3              72      
73
       74       end